Jump to content



Photo

WOW, lockheed exoskeleton


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 09 March 2009 - 11:06 AM

Check it out. I wonder how much and how loud it is
  • 0

#2 Michael Suchar

Michael Suchar

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 32 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 09 March 2009 - 01:22 PM

Nice. But a mere toy comopared to Raytheon's exoskeleton.

http://www.raytheon....08_exoskeleton/
  • 0

#3 Joshua Harrison

Joshua Harrison

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 127 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 09 March 2009 - 03:20 PM

Nice. But a mere toy comopared to Raytheon's exoskeleton.

http://www.raytheon....08_exoskeleton/



Mabye, but I can see the lockheed one actually fitting into our world somehow while the ratheon one is far too much for any steadicam application.

josh
  • 0

#4 G. Grammatikos

G. Grammatikos

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Greece

Posted 09 March 2009 - 03:43 PM

Eric .. very interesting ,i think is the future on steadicam (3-5 years ),i think that the unit is not noissy (soldiers must be quiet) but how much it cost and how flexible is?the next 10 years i believe exosceleton it will replace the steadicam vest or hardness(price it will be the only problem) .Michael forget Raytheon (too noisy ,too big ,too power hungry and need a lot of work yet ,plus 2 people and an ob van for carry it,hulk look almost ready !!if we can adjust a socket block on it and someone can try to operate it !!!! Maybe Garett and Tiffen must have a look on it !!!!
  • 0

#5 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 09 March 2009 - 06:32 PM

Nice. But a mere toy comopared to Raytheon's exoskeleton.

http://www.raytheon....08_exoskeleton/



Yeah but the Lockheed one is small and lite weight, self powered and quiet. the Raytheon one is not. I'll take the Lockheed one.
  • 0

#6 Brant S. Fagan SOC

Brant S. Fagan SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 407 posts
  • Charlestown, New Hampshire, USA

Posted 09 March 2009 - 06:49 PM

Gents--

Sign me up for one of the Lockheed sets!

Remember the seemingly ancient US Army tests of the Steadicam as a platform for the M60?

Once the user was knocked to the ground he was in fact "turtled" under the gear and the weapon.

I like the medium tech version of the Lockheed system and the fact that it comes off and apart quickly and stores compactly.

Check the Raytheon video and notice the long tech-wrap covered umbilical snake that must connect to the DIT tent and a bank of Genesis batteries. Just what we all need, another honking cable run! Even if you can't feel it!
  • 0

#7 Alec Jarnagin SOC

Alec Jarnagin SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1800 posts
  • New York City, USA

Posted 09 March 2009 - 07:10 PM

Ah, yeah, that could be pretty useful. As battery technology continues to take off, it will only help the cause.
  • 0

#8 Amando Crespo

Amando Crespo

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 776 posts
  • Madrid Spain

Posted 09 March 2009 - 08:42 PM

Hi friends!.
I´m not against the new technological advances applied to our profession. My mind is openning for everything. It will be an advance to have a gadget like an exo-HELP to do more confortable our work.
About links you posted, I think that new tech.. Are in it first steeps... Growing, of course, but not for our steadicam ops generation. May be for 10-15 years on the future.
I´d like to be here to see it, but not like active operator.... At this time, I´ll be 55-60 years old....Uf!....All my time for Anita and relax....
  • 0

#9 Alfeo Dixon SOC

Alfeo Dixon SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 756 posts
  • Atlanta

Posted 09 March 2009 - 09:45 PM

Mabye, but I can see the lockheed one actually fitting into our world somehow while the ratheon one is far too much for any steadicam application.

josh

Funny how Lockheed gets the approval while the gentalman in this tread: You have to see this .., This is Steady Bionicle man got ripped on by many ops. Looks along the same principles but with highly paid engineers in a R&D lab and not the garage or basement of a lone forward thinking operator. I wonder if those that laughed will become the butt of the joke when they include on one these in the kit?

-Alfeo
  • 0

#10 Joshua Harrison

Joshua Harrison

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 127 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 09 March 2009 - 10:16 PM

Mabye, but I can see the lockheed one actually fitting into our world somehow while the ratheon one is far too much for any steadicam application.

josh

Funny how Lockheed gets the approval while the gentalman in this tread: You have to see this .., This is Steady Bionicle man got ripped on by many ops. Looks along the same principles but with highly paid engineers in a R&D lab and not the garage or basement of a lone forward thinking operator. I wonder if those that laughed will become the butt of the joke when they include on one these in the kit?

-Alfeo


I'm not sure why I'm being quoted here I don't remember laughing at that guy. But on that topic it's a good thing we didn't have youtube when Garrett was inventing because perhaps some of his earlier designs would have been posted and laughed at. Instead we have an incredible device that still works pretty much the same way for decades.

Back on topic, I'm pretty sure that we won't see this kind of tech in our world anytime due to the fact that this is in the military world and probably costs a (pro) arm and a leg. (ha!)

Josh
  • 0

#11 Alfeo Dixon SOC

Alfeo Dixon SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 756 posts
  • Atlanta

Posted 10 March 2009 - 09:00 AM

I'm not sure why I'm being quoted here I don't remember laughing at that guy.

Nope, at least not on record. ;) Your response was of approval and just wanted to make that point, not to say you took a stab at the other guy.
  • 0

#12 Kevin M. Andersen

Kevin M. Andersen

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • NY/LA

Posted 10 March 2009 - 10:38 PM

Endurance increase? yes.

Physical strength improvement? yes.

Does it make art by itself? no

Makes me remember a long ago director friend (circa 1979) who dissed the steadicam saying "It won't make camera operators better camera operators."

Still I wonder if this exoskeleton would have helped me work those 20 hour steadicam days chasing kids on a football field or rushing up a train aisle with an arribl in low mode.

Maybe it could make me taller or have the hair regrow on my head.
  • 0

#13 Michael Suchar

Michael Suchar

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 32 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 11 March 2009 - 12:23 AM

I agree the lockheed unit is pretty cool. I just thought I throw something out for comparison. By the time I learn the art I'll be out of business if these things end up for sale to the public at a reasonable price.
  • 0

#14 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 11 March 2009 - 01:28 AM

Still I wonder if this exoskeleton would have helped me work those 20 hour steadicam days chasing kids on a football field or rushing up a train aisle with an arribl in low mode.

It might but then again an Arri 235 might be an even better choice.

~Jess
  • 0

#15 Charles Papert

Charles Papert

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2224 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 11 March 2009 - 08:35 AM

BL's were never a "choice", Jess...!
  • 0




PLC - Bartech

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Boland Communications

Omnishot Systems

Engineered Cinema Solutions

rebotnix Technologies

GPI Pro Systems

Wireless Video Systems

Teradek

Varizoom Follow Focus

PLC Electronics Solutions

BOXX

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

SkyDreams

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

IDX